Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I won't know for a few weeks as I've got a clutch to do, a cage to fit, a new seat mount to make, and a splitter to make and fit before I can get to the track =\

Keep tabs on my build thread though, I always talk results in there.

  • 2 months later...
  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What do people recommend for caster alignment for semis? Is it better to have more caster and less camber or the other way around? and how much is too much?

Thanks

yep more castor, less camber. Castor is dynamic camber so you get the benefits without the drawback on straight line traction.

you have too much caster when either:

* you cannot turn the steering wheel

* the wheel fits the guard or firewall

rightio, thanks duncan :)

getting an alignment next week, I think this should be ok

Front, -3deg camber, 1mm total toe out, 5deg castor

Rear, -1.5 camber, 1mm total toe in ( till i hit a bump, then 11ty camber and toe)

sounds like a reasonable start. I would go a little more camber in the GTR but I think your car is strut front end, right? I'd also go less toe at the rear but again it is different to gtr setup.

On the advice of other S13 drivers I ended up with almost -3 fron and -1.5 rear camber, and total 2mm toe out front and total 2mm toe in rear,

Castor I'm not sure, as much as I could get was the advice.

The toe will be interesting and may be finessed at the track.

Yep, mac strut.

Only issue with toe at the rear dan is my car has semi trailing arm irs, every time the suspension moves the alignment changes drastically. from static to full bump is something like .5mm to 12mm a side. same with camber

Don't worry, you'll go faster than me anyway, toe will make no difference when the driver is a ham sandwich (me).

:D

Would you try doing the alignment yourself? as that was why I started this thread.

Only issue with toe at the rear dan is my car has semi trailing arm irs, every time the suspension moves the alignment changes drastically. from static to full bump is something like .5mm to 12mm a side. same with camber

Get onto Stew Wilkins, he's been playing with 1600s and Z cars for a long time, should have some gear and know how.

http://www.swmotorsport.com.au/index.php

  • 9 months later...

thought id bump this thread up again. :)

i now have a r32/33 multilink rear setup in my car, what alignment do people recommend for them? im using A050s at the moment

No idea from me, but I can bump this also and say that my car handled quite well in my opinion at the logic day I did, it felt nice and direct.

It seemed to air on the id of understeer at the limit in a faster speed sweeper which I think is roughly how you want it anyway?

I wouldn't mind it to be a touch more neutral so I'm assuming a little less front camber or a little firmer in the rear?

James I reckon the big trick is to install adjustable upper links in that rear end. That will allow you to get the camber setting you want, and most importantly, to dial out bump steer from big toe changes as it moves through its travel. Dynamic change is what can make them a handful, as you'd know with the old semi trailing arms.

I'd imagine yours will not be using a whole heap of travel so it's going to be easier to dial things in. It should be possible to get minimal toe change if you're using 50mm of bump and similar for droop.

Static settings, I'd think the 1 - 1.5 neg camber and 1 - 2mm toe in per side. Run it and go from there.

Thanks man. It's had adjustable gear in so it so that won't be a problem. Yeah, the old semi trailing irs is/was quite a handful. Hoping even with some bump Steer the new setup will be a massive improvement.

I had it aligned today. Went with -1.5 camber as you suggested but dialed it back to 0.7mm toe in a side. Rear Toe is used mainly for stability is it not? If I need I can adjust it at the track.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about. Reliability of everything in a 34 drops MASSIVELY above the 300kw mark. Keeping everything going great at beyond that value will cost ten times the $. Clutches become shit, gearboxes (and engines/bottom ends) become consumable, traction becomes crap. The good news is looking legalish/actually being legal is slighly under the 300kw mark. I would make the assumption you want to ditch the stock plenum too and want to go a front facing unit of some description due to the cross flow. Do the bends on a return flow hurt? Not really. A couple of bends do make a difference but not nearly as much in a forced induction situation. Add 1psi of boost to overcome it. Nobody has ever gone and done a track session monitoring IAT then done a different session on a different intercooler and monitored IAT to see the difference here. All of the benefits here are likely in the "My engine is a forged consumable that I drive once a year because it needs a rebuild every year which takes 9 months of the year to complete" territory. It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about with this car.
    • By "reverse flow", do you mean "return flow"? Being the IC having a return pipe back behind the bumper reo, or similar? If so... I am currently making ~250 rwkW on a Neo at ~17-18 psi. With a return flow. There's nothing to indicate that it is costing me a lot of power at this level, and I would be surprised if I could not push it harder. True, I have not measured pressure drop across it or IAT changes, but the car does not seem upset about it in any way. I won't be bothering to look into it unless it starts giving trouble or doesn't respond to boost increases when I next put it on the dyno. FWIW, it was tuned with the boost controller off, so achieving ~15-16 psi on the wastegate spring alone, and it is noticeably quicker with the boost controller on and yielding a couple of extra pounds. Hence why I think it is doing OK. So, no, I would not arbitrarily say that return flows are restrictive. Yes, they are certainly restrictive if you're aiming for higher power levels. But I also think that the happy place for a street car is <300 rwkW anyway, so I'm not going to be aiming for power levels that would require me to change the inlet pipework. My car looks very stock, even though everything is different. The turbo and inlet pipes all look stock and run in the stock locations, The airbox looks stock (apart from the inlet being opened up). The turbo looks stock, because it's in the stock location, is the stock housings and can't really be seen anyway. It makes enough power to be good to drive, but won't raise eyebrows if I ever f**k up enough for the cops to lift the bonnet.
    • There is a guy who said he can weld me piping without having to cut chassis, maybe I do that ? Or do I just go reverse flow but isn’t reverse flow very limited once again? 
    • I haven’t yet cut the chassis, maybe I switch to a reverse flow. I’ve got the Intercooler mounted as I already had it but not cut yet. Might have to speak to an engineer 
    • Yes that’s another issue, I always have a front mount, plus will be turbo plus intake will big hasstle. I’ve been told if it looks stock they’re fine with it by a couple others who have done it ahahaha.    I know @Kinkstaah said the stock gtt airbox is limiting but I might just have to do that to avoid a defect so it atleast looks legit. Or an enclosed pod so it’s hidden away and feed air from the snorkel and below Intercooler holes like kinstaah mentioned. Hmm what to do 
×
×
  • Create New...